How do you handle deprecations of old stuff for the new contribution
(assuming it needs it)? Seems weird to have a major release that
immediately has deprecations. At the same time, it seems weird to
have a major release that doesn't contain new features. If anything,
it is our best opportunity to put in new stuff
Traditionally, the only difference between .9 and .0 has been removal
of deprecations. This time around we are saying also JDK 1.5.
Not saying we can't do it, just wondering.
On Oct 30, 2009, at 3:31 PM, DM Smith wrote:
I don't see any reason to freeze new contributions from any release.
On 10/30/2009 03:19 PM, Robert Muir wrote:
thanks Michael.
does anyone else have any opinion on this issue?
fyi we already have several new features committed to 3.0 contrib
already (see contrib/CHANGES),
but I don't too much care either way, if I should not be adding
this feature to 3.0, I'd like to set the version in jira to 3.1
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 5:13 PM, Michael McCandless <luc...@mikemccandless.com
> wrote:
I think we should allow new features into contrib for 3.0.
I don't even like holding new features from core for 3.0.
In general I don't think it's healthy when trunk is locked down....
Trunk should be like a locomotive that's plowing ahead at all times.
Mike
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 1:48 PM, Robert Muir <rcm...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> What is the consensus on new features for contrib for Lucene 3.0?
I know
> that for core, its mostly a java 5 upgrade and deprecation removal.
>
> I want to make sure LUCENE-1606 is set to the right version, but
I figured
> its really not just about that specific issue, I would like to
know the
> plans in general.
>
> Thanks,
> Robert
>
> --
> Robert Muir
> rcm...@gmail.com
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
--
Robert Muir
rcm...@gmail.com
